I very nearly resurrected the thread that shall not be named, but then worked out how it would go:

What time is it in forum land 'cause its twenty minutes into the future. Then i thought, Ritchie would chime in with a go away, I'm having forty winks. Then Dayna would tell us about a lovely song from 237 years ago she'd just heard on the radio, then some prat, who's previous name escapes me would say something stupid and boring, then Des would say: my arse, then Gordon would do an interview with his goat (we're still waiting!), then...

The time? That is an interesting subject. I've got my PC clock set to show my time here, & the time in UK. It says 8:31 AM Eastern Standard Time & 1:32 your time. I know there's about 4-5 hours difference, but I don't understand the extra half hour. Something isn't right.
I don't really know any songs from 200 years ago.

My comment about Forest Gump in the other thread? I must be thinking about chocolate.

In quantum mechanics, time plays a role unlike any other observable. We find that measuring whether an event happened, and measuring when an event happened are fundamentally different - the two measurements do not correspond to compatible observables and interfere with each other. We also propose a basic limitation on measurements of the arrival time of a free particle given by $1/{\bar E_k}$ where ${\bar E_k}$ is the particle's kinetic energy. The temporal order of events is also an ambiguous concept in quantum mechanics. It is not always possible to determine whether one event lies in the future or past of another event. One cannot measure whether one particle arrives to a particular location before or after another particle if they arrive within a time of $1/{\bar E}$ of each other, where ${\bar E}$ is the total kinetic energy of the two particles. These new inaccuracy limitations are dynamical in nature, and fundamentally different from the Heisenberg uncertainty relations. They refer to individual measurements of a single quantity. It is hoped that by understanding the role of time in quantum mechanics, we may gain new insight into the role of time in a quantum theory of gravity innit.

Des Bowring wrote:In quantum mechanics, time plays a role unlike any other observable. We find that measuring whether an event happened, and measuring when an event happened are fundamentally different - the two measurements do not correspond to compatible observables and interfere with each other. We also propose a basic limitation on measurements of the arrival time of a free particle given by $1/{\bar E_k}$ where ${\bar E_k}$ is the particle's kinetic energy. The temporal order of events is also an ambiguous concept in quantum mechanics. It is not always possible to determine whether one event lies in the future or past of another event. One cannot measure whether one particle arrives to a particular location before or after another particle if they arrive within a time of $1/{\bar E}$ of each other, where ${\bar E}$ is the total kinetic energy of the two particles. These new inaccuracy limitations are dynamical in nature, and fundamentally different from the Heisenberg uncertainty relations. They refer to individual measurements of a single quantity. It is hoped that by understanding the role of time in quantum mechanics, we may gain new insight into the role of time in a quantum theory of gravity innit.

I looked and looked and couldn't find the a*** word in that Mr Bowring, but I'll certainly use it.
Cheers